ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

Information

We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

And hell, for that matter, tell us what your hypothesis is. What mechanism have you discovered, which you think is absent from the current synthesis of the theory of natural selection? I've never seen you express an inkling of an alternative model, which you're attempting to support as a replacement to natural selection.

And no, I'm not going to wade through your incoherent blog to try to find where you've mentioned it, if you've talked about it in there. If you can't express it here, in simple, concise language, then you're right, I'm not interested in hearing what you have to say. All I've ever seen from you is the sort of inane attacks that I would expect from a creationist conspiracy-nut (natural selection requires the supernatural; natural selection leads to eugenics), with no alternative even hinted at.

@ Shaun Johnston Of course Darwinian theory of evolution should be criticized. Bring it on! But be specific. A vast army of biologists have amassed and reviewed data on the subject for a century and a half. You need a level of expertise to even have a debate with these scientists.

What if you are wrong? Even misguided? I see you pissing and moaning on your blog how you've been attacked?

Why should your "theory" not also be subject to criticism? Show some comprehension of the subject and show some maturity.

Or come up with something to say that is worth listening to. I just took a glance at your latest blog post, and it's borderline incoherent. I can't even figure out what you're getting at with your mountain metaphor, and I'd love to know why you have a bug up your ass about eugenics.

I'm waiting for someone with an actual lab, running actual experiments, to turn up something, rather than you making absurd claims. When you keep coming at us with deliberately provocative claims about natural selection being supernatural, we're just going to think you're an asshole.

This is science, not theology. Where's your data? Where are the peer-reviewed studies that support your wild assertions? After your last ridiculous post, I can't even be bothered to check the latest stuff you've written, unless you're pointing us to something written by someone more credible than you.

The model of natural selection is criticized and modified all the time, when real scientists discover some detail turned up in their experiments. When you have something similar to contribute, rather than wild speculation, I might care about what you have to say.

No, about natural selection not having the physical properties it would need to work, and the primary support for it being flawed. Do you agree that is possible, or is natural selection beyond criticism?